Cura 3.0

I've been using the newest version of Cura from Ultimaker because it gives the option of a gradual infill. One of the biggest benefits I've noticed is the remarkable decrease in print times. For example, Cura for Robo estimated a time of 1 day, 19 hours for a print, and the same item with the same settings in Cura 3.0 was 17 hours and 27 minutes.

I'm not super knowledgeable about how slicers go about identifying print times, but I printed in both settings and the times were very close to estimates and the quality of the prints were the same. Just thought I would share the info with the community!

 

The thing I've noticed is that on the R2 itself I get a crazy estimate. For example, Cura may say 7 hours. When I load it it and print it the R2 console will estimate 30 hours. Then it actually takes closer to the 7 hours that Cura originally estimated. Is this normal?

 

Ive noticed the same thing. I think its just like uploading or downloading files from the internet. It's trying to calculate a time on the fly and doing its best guess.

My experience has been, the times estimated in Cure are close to the actual print time, but usually a little bit longer. I'm guessing that Cura isn't taking into account the warm up time and the bed leveling time, and that is where the little bit of extra time comes from. Otherwise, I think the Cura estimates have been pretty good.

 

Yep. Octoprint uses several different estimation algorithms that evolve during print. At the start it kinda looks at how fast it builds up layers compared to total file layer count, but since the first layers are usually way longer to print due to being 100% infill and usually with slowdown for the first one it's VERY far off initially.
Wait until you've done a dozen "normal" layers or so and it will have adjusted itself to be pretty accurate.

 

On a related note, the Cura Robo ABS profiles on the dev branch work really nicely for ABS.


https://github.com/Robo3D/Slicing-Profiles/tree/cura-3-dev

 

Question 1.
I recently purchased an R2 (I had the original R1 from KickStarter).
Can I assume that the Cura 2.5 version recommended by Robo can be upgraded to the latest (3.5) and as long as I install the R2 profile, I can use the new version?

Question 2 -
I'm not sure if I understand "Gradual Infill". Could someone either explain it or point me to some explanation?

Thanks,

 

Thanks for the Question 1 info. In my experience, the guys that are very active in an endeavor (like 3d printing) tend to gravitate to a software tool because it is "better" and not just "the one I started out with. While in my latest "learning" stage, I'd like to know what slicer is most popular without getting into a competition.
So, if Cura isn't the "do all, be all, bellwether" for model prep, is Slic3r, SimplifyeD, or another more popular with the seasoned modelers?
Opinion requested.

Anyone what to take a stap at answering my question 2?
Thanks,

 

Thanks for the reply.
As a veteran engineer/scientist for IBM research for over 30 years, I am used to tweaking, learning curves, and "the bleeding edge" in new technologies (I spent many of those years (1974 - 2005) developing Smart Homes and Premises...concepts, hardware, software and architecture.....long before they were vogue).
My last 13 years (2005 - 2018) were spent in the CNC plasma cutting biz developing specialized electronics for controlling the z-axis while cutting steel plate at 60,000 degrees.....i.e Torch Height Controller
That said, I very much enjoy the learning curves and opinions of "veteran makers" who have a vested insight on certain apps such as Cura, Simplify3D, Slic3r, etc. as well as 3D modelling app such as Fusion 360, etc.

I welcome the experienced opinion.
Thank you.

 

Since Simplify3D cost $ instead of being free, can anyone who uses it tell me why they think its worth the cost? I don't mind paying for something if there is significant benefit in using it.

 

Thanks for the input about the two.
For the last 20 years I have been deep into CNC machining/creation endeavors including plasma, mill (Bridgeport and Sherline and everything in between), routers, lasers, and lathes (from Sherline to Clausing and several in between). Most have been powered by Mach3 , as it was very versatile.

To me, the 3D priniting is just CNC that is additive instead of "subtractive"....though that may be a little simplified.
In 3D printing, there needs to be the "adaptive" features as the material changes much the same as CNC Plasma cutting requires adaptive Torch Height Controllers because the heat affected zone changes and the torch height has to adapt to metal warpage, changing thickness (diamond plate), etc. Designing THC electronics was my business for over 10 years. Needless to say, I am very familiar with G-code.

I very much want to get into the "knickers" of the slicers available and see which ones are a benefit for the things I want to do.
If the Robo team isn't going to produce the second extruder option, I'd like to look at it a bit and see if I can make it happen. Otherwise, I'll purchase another brand of 3D printer that DOES have the extra extruder and keep both the R2 and the multi-extruder one for different build capabilities.

BTW, has Robo released their firmware source or is what they use available somewhere so I can see the G-code commands they honor?

Thanks again for the info. I look forward to contributing soon to the group.